Agenda item

Street Scene Rapid Improvement Plan Update

Minutes:

The Panel was provided with a report and a verbal update about the Street Scene Rapid Improvement Plan by the Director of Regeneration and Environment (in the absence of the Assistant Director of Housing).  It was noted that due to the floods  that had occured mid-November 2019, the work had been paused in order to deal with them and mobilise the longer-term recovery (resulting in a significant backlog).  It was reported that following a review of achievements and priorities, the improvement plan was recommenced earlier this month.

 

The Chair informed the Director of Regeneration and Environment that it would have been helpful to have had a written report prior to the meeting. 

 

The Director of Regeneration and Environment explained how over Summer 2019, grass cutting and litter picks had not met with the appropriate standards.  As a result, a full strategic service review was being undertaken called the Rapid Improvement Plan (RIP). 

 

It was also noted that a significant amount of work had already taken place and involved targeted site interventions in the midst of an independent Association of Public Service Excellence (APSE) review.  It was explained that the outcome of this review would be due February 2020 and would help provide an independent view and steer on areas of focus for improvements. It was added that the APSE review would help identify the optimum method of working, relevant performance indicators and the steps required to be an industry exemplar of best practice.

 

It was also reported that governance arrangements had been established and a commitment had been made to ensure the deliverability of a number of key actions and accountability to the Executive. 

 

There was a discussion held and the following issues were raised;

 

APSE Review - Concern was raised around the use of a consultancy (APSE) and the costs incurred from the independent review.  Members were informed that APSE had experience from predominantly working within the public sector and formed a good understanding of the practice.

 

Recruitmentand Qualifications - Members were informed that recruitment had been an issue in filling vacancies.  Concern was raised around what impact the Councils recruitment problems was having on current productivity.  It was confirmed that there were presently 17 vacancies going through a recruitment exercise.  It was felt that more needed to be done to make employment in this area more attractive and to maintain staff in those posts.  It was noted that staff had commented that working in the locality model would be better, with greater knowledge and commitment and would therefore provide better job satisfaction.

 

Members were informed that both internal and private recruitment routes had been used (of which both had experienced minimum success) and the latest recruitment drive had returned better applicants.  It was stated that more was being done to drive training down and enable those better qualified to rise through the service.  A Member questioned how performance management was being addressed through appraisals, although it was acknowledged that they had been impacted by staff shortages. 

 

A Member commented that they believed a lack of horticultural skills/qualification had contributed to some of the issues.  That Member later added that employees should also be trained in fine turf in order to respond to the particular requirements of bowling greens.

 

Service Standards - A Member raised their concerns that the service was not up to standards and therefore not meeting its targets.  It was commented that non-senior officers were attending meetings.  It was also questioned whether the service was undertaking what it should be doing and therefore meeting the requirements of the European Protection Act. 

 

In particular, the following points were raised;

 

·            Concerns about specific issues such as litter picking taking place prior to waste collections in certain areas. 

 

·            Charging for the disposal of fridge freezers and whether it was cost effective and successful.  Members were informed that some localities did not charge and fridge freezers were still continuing to be disposed of.

 

·            A recognition that litter tended to concentrate in certain area and it was briefly considered what could be done, for example, in areas where there was a high number of parked cars such as in close proximity to the Doncaster Royal Infirmary. 

 

·            That high quantities of cannabis were being planted in rural areas.

 

·            That the highest number of complaints took place during the Spring/Summer season.

 

·            Where the responsibilities of cemeteries came under?

 

Members were informed that the Council was waiting on the outcomes from the APSE review and the Rapid Response Programme that would provide an improvement programme for the service.  It was explained that the review would also consider looking at whether the Council had the right resources in place and was achieving best value.

 

Businesses - It was questioned whether a litter tax could be placed on local businesses (that may have contributed to littering).  It was questioned what powers were in place that could be applied to businesses or whether as a minimum, some form of dialogue could be undertaken.  Members were informed that there had been some success in the immediate locality.  It was commented that some organisations had a litter strategy and that some sponsorships were in place i.e. at Sandall Park.  It was noted that as a local business operation, McDonalds had provided a strategy for litter clean-ups around its locality.  Reference was made to other local authorities litter policies such as that of Birmingham City Council.

 

Resources – A Member questioned the resources that would need to be invested against the reductions that had been earmarked for budget allocations.  It was recognised that reductions had made an impact and acknowledged that further investment was required.  It was considered that this was a high priority within communities and a service that needed to be delivered correctly.

 

Members were assured that work was taking place with the Executive to review what funds were available that could be allocated to providing additional resources.

 

It was commented that there was a desire to ensure that the right performance measures were in right place.  Members were assured that this was now taking place and filtering down to Managers and Team Leaders.

         

It was also recognised that the service should be tailored to the specific needs of the Borough and it was anticipated that the findings of the APSE review would inform this further.  It was felt that the review would lead to a more intelligent led service although some Members were of the opinion that there was inconsistency across Neighbourhood Teams.  It was also acknowledged that Members held a great deal of knowledge regarding their wards and within their communities.

 

Looking at whether preventive measures were better than being reactive, the Director of Regeneration and Environment stated that it would require a significant amount of resources to be able to offer a more proactive service across the Borough,

 

It was questioned whether action weeks and concentrating staff to identified areas were cost effective solutions.  It was responded that those actions had been effective in term of remedying problems within targeted areas.

 

A Member commented that they felt previous revisions to Streetscene depots in addition to the standard of quality machinery available had resulted in a negative impact on the service.

 

It was observed by a Member that certain public and private systems had the potential to operate more efficiently.

 

A Member also questioned whether certain services should be placed under the same portfolio.

 

RESOLVED that the Panel receive an update on the outcomes of the APSE review and update on the Rapid Response Programme (including a breakdown of complaints) as part of the Communities and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Workplan 2019/20.

 

Supporting documents: